The paper is already deleted from nature’s website. I also found a review article from 2019 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clim.2018.10.013) talking about SLAMF6 in disease that doesn’t link it only to AML. So maybe read with caution
Not sure what’s up with Nature’s website on your end, but here’s the link that’s working for me to access the paper, which was published today (10-3-25): https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s43018-025-01054-6
Nonetheless, a paper from 6 years ago studying a receptor found on almost half of immune cells should have more current information available by now, if not already. In science, we build on the shoulders of giants and try to expand on the knowledge they helped us understand. Additionally, the older study examines SLAMF6’s function across health and disease, so it’s much more generalized. The new study aims to provide additional context for the earlier findings and focuses on acute myeloid leukemia in particular. I have a PhD in immunology, and it’s astonishing how little we actually understand about the subject. All in all, we understand the ocean better than the immune system, even though there’s more we don’t know about the ocean than we do. Even crazier is that most of our current understanding in immunology is actually for a rat’s immune system and not humans! But you’re not wrong to be cautious, all research papers should be read with a healthy amount of scrutiny. A wise man told me in undergrad that half of what we’d cover in the course would be incorrect, we just don’t know which half.
Seems like the page is back up again, don’t know why it returned dead when I tried to read it. Thanks for the link, I’ll read it in the coming days.
I’m actually just finishing my masters in immunology, and one aspect of it I’ll love (and sometimes dread) is exactly what you said. We know so much about the immune system and still so so little. I’m just always cautious about articles promising new therapies against cancer, because most of the time it only works in mice and fails to validate for humans. And I know some projects from friends and colleagues that got media attention and were greatly exaggerated compared to the actual findings.
What is your PhD thesis about? I’m interested in doing a PhD myself and wonder what other people in immunology worked on
most of the time it only works in mice and fails to validate for humans
which is 99% of all mouse model research. And we keep doing it.
I stopped at the abstract with humanized mouse models.
